Turning a book into a movie isn't a new concept, but it seems that every time I turn around another movie says "based on the best-selling book."
While I enjoy watching those movies to point out every shortcoming, glaring plot holes and flat characters, I also love being blown away by a film's adaptation of a text (e.g. "Angels in America" by Tony Kushner).
However, this time, I'm not sure if I can bring myself to stomach the film adaptation of one of my favorite childhood books "Where the Wild Things Are" by Maurice Sendak.
Since 1963, this has held a special place in our hearts and the film may turn out to be good (even if Mr. Eggers co-wrote the screenplay), but it may just turn out bad, too.
The film comes out in late fall, but the trailers are already out and depict a Max unlike the Max I knew and loved. The boy in the trailer doesn't close his eyes with haughty angst, instead he looks desperate and lost.
Although I'm worried about the movie tarnishing my memory with the book, I'm more worried that people will never read the book and experience the magic within the pages.
One book that may lose its magic adapting into a film is my current favorite book, "The History of Love" by Nicole Krauss.
According to IMDB's Web site, director Alfonso Cuarón bought the rights before the book was published to become a film in 2010. This book has several themes, but survival and survival of the written language are the crux of the story.
If this film is about survival of the written word, wouldn't that get somewhat lost in the film- making process? And although the film adaptation of Sendak's famed novel may lose some of its sentimental shine, Krauss' book has more to lose.
And if you haven't read "The History of Love" then you should be reading it today. Her writing is thought provoking and precise as it digs into my skin and makes me realize just how powerful words can be. One of my favorite passages in "The History of Love" says:
"So many words get lost. They leave the mouth and lose their courage, wandering aimlessly until they are swept into the gutter like dead leaves."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Yes it is a tricky question - I think my take on it is that if people are bookily inclined then they might well go and get the book after enjoying a 'film treatment', and if they're not bookily inclined then they were probably never going to read the book anyway. But I do feel the original book usually doesn't get anything like enough of a mention, so that most of the audience may not even realise there's a book to be found. I absolutely agree with you about Wild Things being totally brilliant and I really hope you're not devastated if you do see the film - there seem so many places a film could go horribly wrong - but maybe this one somehow won't!
ReplyDeleteI love that you used the word "bookily"... I'm going to try and fit that into as many conversations as possible today. I hope you're right about Where the Wild Things Are because that book is so special. I'll swallow your optimism then and go see it anyway :)
ReplyDeleteBy the way, thank you so much for all of your comments, they always make me think and I am touched that you appreciate what I'm doing here. Thank you so much again.
Thank you for your kind words, but I do feel all the thanks are due to you for raising such thought-provoking topics in the first place! (I'm just naturally argumentative and can't resist having my say...)
ReplyDelete